🚀 go-pugleaf

Well, I have my 5.2 uucp working and so far its looks ok.  I don't know if
I want to tell you what I had to do to get it running because its depressing.
I wish I could understand why AT&T after 15 years, has failed to make the
standard distribution uucp work with a damm.  If I really didn't need it, I
would have tossed the uucp in the trash (its that bad...).  Of course, how
much easier the job would have been under 5.2 instead of Version 7, I don't
know.  Much of the uucp code just plain *stinks*.  I wonder if AT&T wanted to
make the "standard" 5.2 uucp really rotten so you would pay the $5,000 for 
the honey danber uucp?  Nah!  No one would do that! ;-)

5.2 uucp bad code, example #1:

	The way it was: The program calls the system()
			library call to do the work of a "standard" 2 call.
	
		strcpy(cmd, "chmod 600 ");
		strcat(cmd, ttyname(fd));
		system(cmd);

	The way it is now: We use the chmod() system call which is in every
			   Unix system I know of.

		chmod(ttyname(fd), 0600);

5.2 uucp bad code, example #2:

	The way it was:	This code would always return "uucp" since was
			the first login name in the passwd file for the
			uid.

		/* determine the user who just logged in */
		guinfo( getuid(), User, msg);
		strcpy(Loginuser, User);

	The way it is now: We use getlogin() to find the "true" user 
			   login name.  The callcheck() function was 
			   blowing up because of the wrong input data about
			   the user; causing "BAD LOGIN/MACHINE NAME" errors.

		/* determine the user who just logged in */
		guinfo( getuid(), User, msg);
		if ( (p=getlogin()) )
			strcpy(Loginuser, p);
		else
			strcpy(Loginuser, User);
		
The above examples are but a few of the problems I have found in the standard
5.2 uucp from AT&T, when you get your XELOS tapes, check out the uucp.  If it
works well, thank some poor slob at P-E because he/she did some work to get it
running...

The 8/32 comm machine is having a nightmare and we decided to put it to rest.
Next week a 3220 comes rolling in and that will be the comm machine.  It will
have 1 megabyte instead of the 1/2 megabyte of the 8/32.  The 3220 is a very
solid machine and will give little trouble (if any).  This 5.2 uucp will
be running on it.  I really want you all to have a dedicated machine that is
not going up and down....  Please have patience...  I am working almost around
the clock to make the uucp network reliable and fast. 

When I catch up with my work, I'll see what we can do about Xelos bug reports
on the net.  Please don't expect fixes since I don't have all *that* much
time...

-earlw
-- 
Earl Wallace
UUCP:   ..!{ihnp4, ucbvax!hplabs, ucbvax!twg}!pesnta!earlw
PHONE:	(408) 727-5540 x230
USMAIL:	Perkin-Elmer Corp., Santa Clara, Calif. 95054